Legal Opinion

Carr v. Scott

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided September 21, 1977No. 764SC972Published

1Opinion of the Court

BRITT, Judge.

Plaintiff assigns as error the trial court’s allowance of defendants’ motion for a directed verdict. We think the motion was properly allowed on the ground of plaintiff’s contributory negligence as a matter of law.

In Bledsoe v. Gaddy, 10 N.C. App. 470, 472, 179 S.E. 2d 167, 169 (1971), the test for determining whether a directed verdict should be allowed on the basis of contributory negligence is stated:

“A directed verdict on the ground of contributory negligence will be allowed only when plaintiff’s evidence, taken in the light most favorable to him, so clearly establishes…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Dreher v. . DivineSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  2. Galloway v. HartmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  3. Anderson v. MannCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
  4. Bledsoe v. GaddyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API